One has to wonder what Nigel Wright really thinks of Stephen Harper. After all, in the prime minister's estimation, Wright has gone from the soul of virtue to the source of political putrefaction. Michael Harris writes:
Think about Harper’s “narratives”. First, it was full support for Wright and no resignation; that morphed into accepting his resignation with regret; next it was Wright did not resign but was sacked; and finally it was righteous indignation and a sense of betrayal that drove the PM to fire his rogue chief-of-staff.
Through all of the Harper's changing narratives, Wright has remained silent. But, unlike Harper, he has co-operated with the RCMP:
The difference between Harper’s idea of cooperation and Wright’s? Harper denied he had documents until he was formally and specifically asked for them. Wright contacted the RCMP and volunteered his information. So who is really cooperating?
And what exactly does it mean when the PM first said that “no one” in his office knew that Wright had given $90,000 to Duffy, and then changed that to “not many” knew? Did he mean not many of the cleaning staff?
Perhaps Wright is doing more than considering his career options. Perhaps he has learned what so many others who have worked for Stephen Harper have learned: Loyalty leads to dismissal. Perhaps, Harris writes, Wright is doing some genuine soul searching:
I hope he forgives me for saying it, but this is no longer politics; that quaint thing Anglicans call the soul is in play. If this matter comes to court, with Wright either as an accused or a witness, he will be sworn in and asked under oath what really happened.
Perhaps he has not only learned the price of loyalty. Perhaps he has also learned the price of integrity.